|
"The Story of My Arrest and Accusation"
- by Michel Kilo
This article originally appeared in Arabic on
"Levant News"
Summary and Translation by Joe Pace
for "Syria Comment"
Dec. 16, 2006
The article begins with Michel Kilo,
Syria's most articulate opposition member, accusing the
authorities of “misleading public opinion with the
delusion that there is a terrifying conspiracy, with
hidden threads, and that I am plotting it and that I am
its center.” Kilo was arrested in May 2006 after signing
the "Beirut-Damascus Declaration" and having led the
Syrian opposition's attempts for unify its ranks.
His interrogators grilled him about the
Beirut-Damascus Declaration. He says that they were
polite and courteous at the branch and said that “my
presence in the [security branch] did not detract from
my value as a political, national thinker and as an
intellectual known for integrity.” True to his
nationalist credentials, he says that his intentions
were to better relations between Syria and Lebanon to
prevent Israel and America from exploiting the rift. “I
told the interrogators in the security [branch] that an
essential element of the declaration which cannot be
overlooked focuses on the praising of Syrian-Lebanese
cooperation which led to the end of the Israeli
occupation of the south, and the signatories demand that
neither country become a pathway or headquarters against
the other, and their insistence on unified efforts to
liberate the Golan and all remaining occupied Lebanese
land, and solidify the Syrian-Lebanese
relationship…which would ensure their unity and make
them immune from foreign penetration, destruction, or
weakening.”
Kilo recounts some of the back-and-forth
in the interrogation. They said that the Zionists and
America supported the position outlined in Declaration
since the March 14 contingent supported it. Kilo
responds: Washington and Tel Aviv want to drive a rift
between Syria and Lebanon whereas the Declaration calls
for the opposite. They accused Kilo of siding with
outside powers, noting the similarities between
Resolution 1680 and the Declaration. Kilo replies that
any similarities are coincidental and that his purpose
is anathema to the West’s since the West fears the very
unity for which Kilo calls.
He mentions that Professor Marwan al-Luji,
the public prosecutor in Damascus forced four of the
signers to sign a statement saying: “Michel Kilo agreed
with Khaddam regarding the declaration in exchange for
his immediate release.” On June 11, 2006, an article
appeared in Ath-Thawra claiming that the investigation
proved that he had met with Marwan Hamaada in Cyprus and
took money to sign the Declaration. Kilo sent a letter
to the newspaper contesting the story, but the newspaper
refused to publish it. He tried to raise a suit, but the
public prosecutor refused.
The court ordered Michel’s release but
the public prosecutor fabricated another case to keep
him in prison and has prevented his defense team from
contesting it. Despite being publicly accused of opening
up channels of communications with Khaddam, the
prosecutor has yet to issue that charge, or any other
justifying his continued detention. Writes Kilo: “I told
the judge of the second criminal court that I was being
detained on one charge and being tried for another, an
undeclared charge. I demanded that they charge me with
contacting Khaddam or whomever…” in order to contest
it. He reaffirms that the Declaration was for and by
intellectuals and that it is neither allied with nor
beholden to any party or political trend. “It is not a
declaration of incitement, but one of reconciliation
whose sole purpose is to secure the Syrian-Lebanon
relationship on proper grounds and repair a basis for
Arab relations anew.”
He points out the irony that they would
accuse him of cooperating with Khaddam when he had
written articles lambasting him when he was still Vice
President and was in turn threatened with imprisonment.
He recalls that he spoke out against Khaddam’s group at
a Temporary Committee for the Damascus Declaration
meeting and called him a “threat to the opposition
because he moves the center of work and decision making
outside of Syria.”
He says that the Beirut-Damascus
Declaration is not the reason for his arrest. He says
that the authorities are aware that he did not contact
any hostile elements, that they have the recordings of
the Committee meetings sessions evidencing his mistrust
of Khaddam, and that he has never called for the
initiation of hostilities against Syria. The reason is
that “there are those who want to take revenge on me
because I am a symbol of the opposition, rational and
socially accepted, and because I focused my efforts on
succeeding in building a vision based on shared ground.”
|
